From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-55866-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 11827 invoked by alias); 7 May 2008 12:56:06 -0000
Received: (qmail 11753 invoked by uid 22791); 7 May 2008 12:56:05 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout3.012.net.il (HELO mtaout3.012.net.il) (84.95.2.7)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 07 May 2008 12:55:45 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([83.130.255.47]) by i_mtaout3.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0K0I00MBC1WU7VH2@i_mtaout3.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Wed, 07 May 2008 16:10:07 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 04:23:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFA] bpstat_do_actions in one place
In-reply-to: <20080507113736.GA32080@caradoc.them.org>
X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
Cc: vladimir@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <uprrye0j5.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <200805051658.32272.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <uabj4ftmh.fsf@gnu.org> <20080505192315.GA19885@caradoc.them.org> <u8wyofsng.fsf@gnu.org> <20080505194130.GA20958@caradoc.them.org> <u7ie8f7iz.fsf@gnu.org> <20080506124322.GA12429@caradoc.them.org> <u4p9bffpd.fsf@gnu.org> <20080506183909.GA2696@caradoc.them.org> <u3aoufso1.fsf@gnu.org> <20080507113736.GA32080@caradoc.them.org>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-05/txt/msg00267.txt.bz2

> Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 07:37:36 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: vladimir@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
> On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 11:02:38AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > That this instance of `backtrace' be aborted, and the loop will
> > continue.
> 
> Interesting.  That's not what I would expect; for instance, I'd
> expect an entire user-defined ("define") command to be aborted.

What user-defined command?  The example was about breakpoint commands,
not about a user-defined command defined by "define", wasn't it?

> If that happened, how would you stop the example I gave?

How would one stop _any_ endless loop?  Ctrl-C, I guess.

Anyway, I don't think `q's behavior should cater first and foremost to
endless loop situations.  Its original intent is save me the time it
takes GDB to emit output I don't want to see, plus the time and
nuisance of typing RET while it does.